3 ms·
I am not restricting myself to looking at the role of judges in a vacuum. Prosecutors, police, regulators, etc. all make individual decisions that amount to "I
by fiatmoney 11y ago
I am not restricting myself to looking at the role of judges in a vacuum. Prosecutors, police, regulators, etc. all make individual decisions that amount to "I will fuck this guy up, because I don't like them". They typically have absolute immunity in making those decisions - as do judges, actually. It makes no sense to condemn judges for exercising mercy contrary to the law in one breath, and in another give prosecutors absolute immunity for their charging or investigatory decisions, regardless on what basis they were made. We evidently wanted a system where no state actor ever faces punishment for any decision they make, and now we have it.
- pdonis 11y ago> We evidently wanted a system where no state actor ever faces punishment for any decision they make Exactly--which means those actors are not exercising "naked personal power"; they are exercising the power as state actors that we gave to them. So if we don't like what they're doing with it, we need to take it away. We have sentences for crimes that are way too extreme in many cases because we told lawmakers with our votes that we wanted them to be "tough on crime" and that we wanted them to wage war on drugs. We have prosecutors and cops who have essentially unlimited discretion for the same reasons. We have a legal system that favors the rich because incumbent politicians who favor their rich donors have a re-election rate in the high 90's even though their approval ratings are in the single digits. The system we have is not "naked personal power"; it's the system that we, the voters, voted for. Democracy is working exactly the way it was designed to work. Burning it to the ground would not make it work better; it would make things worse. The way to make it better is to change the incentives of those who make the laws, by telling them different things with our votes.