0
0

[–] cdglow ago 

According to the article, the dead judge wrote the decision this vote is based on. So while this is very bad, this specific case should be rejudged, and some kind of law should exist to prevent dead peoples' opinions from counting, at least it doesn't look like the outcome in this specific case changed.

It's not a good precedent though and opens up the door for radical abuse. Imagine if a judge was 60% leaning towards siding with one side half-way through a trial and indicated as such. At what point could executing a judge to lock their opinion in place be an actually used strategy? This should be fucking terrifying for judges.

The same system used for jurors who die or fall ill during a trial (alternate jurors who are forced to show up and follow along) might be impractical for the highest courts, so they should fall back to what happens if the alternates aren't available either: declare a mistrial and try again.

0
1

[–] 1HepCat 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Yeah it's not super clear from the article but it seems like the following?:

1) The judge ruled and authored a document/'opinion' to explain the decision

2) The judge died

3) Some court clerk or something filed the opinion, thus making it official

4) The losing party appealed the ruling based on the judge's death prior to the filing.

5) SCOTUS (who has their own dead/dying justice) declared the filing invalid and ordered a retrial with a complete panel of living judges.

Seems like SCOTUS made the right call. I'm surprised this is the first time something like this has come up. I think the main concern is that the dead judge is no longer around to authenticate his ruling. E.g., in case the clerk altered the document (or fabricated the whole thing) before filing it.

Apart from that, the judge had ostensibly locked his ruling in. Apparently, none of his nine colleagues, including those who'd dissented, found the filed document suspicious enough to raise their own stink over it either. If I'm understanding the scenario correctly assassinations would only be effective if you could subsequently convince the public, etc. that the judge was both ready to rule and had indeed already rendered an unfiled verdict. Still not a great loop hole to leave lying around, though.

0
2

[–] thelma 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

of decisions of judges not voted into office and able to be recalled that I give a shit about : zero

0
1

[–] Boyakasha 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

Well, I guess shooting the judge wouldn't help.

1
33

[–] StoneRights 1 point 33 points (+34|-1) ago  (edited ago)

NO MORE!

so when are you going to start using your guns?

0
0

[–] Gorillion ago 

When are you going to start using your stones, Ugg?

Ugg speak big game. But me think Ugg big cave pussy.

1
4

[–] sane [S] 1 point 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

NO MORE because of Trump.

Trump's new SCOTUS, laid down the law yesterday, the 25th of Feb in 9-0 vote overturning this dead judge! :

https://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/courtorders/022519zor_8mjp.pdf#page=13

I suspect Ginsberg used a fax machine from her compound.

2
3

[–] heygeorge 2 points 3 points (+5|-2) ago 

If the court united to vote 9-0, then what in the holy fuck did Trump have to do with that and do you realise it makes you sound deranged to attribute this to him?

[–] [deleted] 1 point 19 points (+20|-1) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

3
1

[–] Fullmetal 3 points 1 point (+4|-3) ago 

Conservatives are too cowardly to be anything more than meme spewing armchair generals.

5
-2

[–] Stephen89 5 points -2 points (+3|-5) ago 

Cuckservatives will never be anything other than weak willed quislings as the country falls to communism. They sold out to leftist corporations long ago

1
2

[–] Illegal_Alligator 1 point 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Americans are kept relatively fat, entertained and occupied, because we have guns.

Once you take the guns away you can throw away the pretenses and impose your will.

1
22

[–] GreyGears 1 point 22 points (+23|-1) ago 

Meanwhile Frenchies are actually fighting their government with next to no weaponry.

There is something very wrong when you are getting a lesson in courage and tenacity from France.

0
6

[–] cantaloupe6 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

It won't stop them from voting.

0
4

[–] Gigglestick 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

They'd probably just get more voters.

0
11

[–] BumbleTummy 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Yes, only in America do you have to put laws in place to stop dead people from voting. Now, what about all those dead private citizens?

0
13

[–] sane [S] 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

Its always been observed that the only dead that vote are Democrats.

0
2

[–] NeoGoat 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

...and only the brain dead vote democratic.