8 ms·

Stifling the first amendment is serious business. When are judges going to be held accountable for their wrong actions?

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
danso 8y ago
IIRC, federal judges can be removed by impeachment. Very unlikely that this judge or any other would be impeached just for a controversial ruling, though: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#Tenure_and_salary https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#...
- throw_away2 8y ago
  Not a federal judge and not an impeachment, but a judge has been removed for a controversial ruling recently: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge-aaron-persky-who-gave-brock-turners-lenient-sentence-sanford-rape-case-recalled/674551002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge-aaron-p...
- forapurpose 8y ago
  Approximately 8 federal judges have been impeached in the last century: https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judges https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judg... That doesn't include how many resigned facing likely impeachment.
- HelloNurse 8y ago
  It isn't merely a controversial ruling, it might be easily construed as a favor to friends (police and/or the clerks who published the document by mistake).
ajross 8y ago
When the filing is made before the appelate court. That's the way the system works.
- gpm 8y ago
  That doesn't hold them accountable. Just stops their action from causing further harm.
AnimalMuppet 8y ago
I'm not sure that trying to prevent publication of something that was filed under seal is a "wrong action" by a judge...
- hedora 8y ago
  It is an incorrect ruling, since it directly contradicts precedent. This sort of thing often slows down promotions into higher courts (as it should — lower courts should not routinely waste everyone’s time and money with rulings that will surely be overturned on appeal).
- astura 8y ago
  It's incorrect from a legal perspective. Judges are required to act within the legal framework.
GavinMcG 8y ago
Their wrong actions? What wrong actions? The judge did their job: they considered the facts and the law, and applied their legal reasoning, and reached a conclusion. The fact that you don't like the conclusion doesn't mean the judge acted wrongly. There's nothing to be held accountable for. The reasoning or decision itself, on the other hand, will go through the processes of review that almost all judicial decisions go through.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

IIRC, federal judges can be removed by impeachment. Very unlikely that this judge or any other would be impeached just for a controversial ruling, though: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#Tenure_and_salary https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_judge#...

throw_away2 8y ago
Not a federal judge and not an impeachment, but a judge has been removed for a controversial ruling recently: https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge-aaron-persky-who-gave-brock-turners-lenient-sentence-sanford-rape-case-recalled/674551002/ https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2018/06/06/judge-aaron-p...
forapurpose 8y ago
Approximately 8 federal judges have been impeached in the last century: https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judges https://www.fjc.gov/history/judges/impeachments-federal-judg... That doesn't include how many resigned facing likely impeachment.
HelloNurse 8y ago
It isn't merely a controversial ruling, it might be easily construed as a favor to friends (police and/or the clerks who published the document by mistake).

ajross 8y ago

When the filing is made before the appelate court. That's the way the system works.

gpm 8y ago
That doesn't hold them accountable. Just stops their action from causing further harm.

AnimalMuppet 8y ago

I'm not sure that trying to prevent publication of something that was filed under seal is a "wrong action" by a judge...

hedora 8y ago
It is an incorrect ruling, since it directly contradicts precedent. This sort of thing often slows down promotions into higher courts (as it should — lower courts should not routinely waste everyone’s time and money with rulings that will surely be overturned on appeal).
astura 8y ago
It's incorrect from a legal perspective. Judges are required to act within the legal framework.

GavinMcG 8y ago

Their wrong actions? What wrong actions? The judge did their job: they considered the facts and the law, and applied their legal reasoning, and reached a conclusion. The fact that you don't like the conclusion doesn't mean the judge acted wrongly. There's nothing to be held accountable for. The reasoning or decision itself, on the other hand, will go through the processes of review that almost all judicial decisions go through.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]