4 ms·

Reducing the number of cases probably should be a goal, and the reasonable way to accomplish that would be for judges to be much more aggressive in dismissing b

Reducing the number of cases probably should be a goal, and the reasonable way to accomplish that would be for judges to be much more aggressive in dismissing bullshit. Some judges are satisfied with lifetime appointments to their current courts. If they aren't, either because they seek appointment to a higher court or because they face reelection campaigns, they have to worry about pissing off their biggest donors. Those, of course, are the lawyers who appear in their courts, who have very little interest in reducing caseload.

gamblor956 7y ago
Local judicial positions are not lifetime positions. They are generally elected or wanted to terms. Only federal judges and (in most states) the highest state court judges have lifetime terms.
pdonis 7y ago
> Reducing the number of cases probably should be a goal, and the reasonable way to accomplish that would be for judges to be much more aggressive in dismissing bullshit. An even better way would be to eliminate laws that let people be hauled into court when they have done no harm. A huge example is the war on drugs: criminalizing mere possession of drugs, with no requirement that the person has to have harmed anyone, means a huge number of drug cases cluttering up the courts that shouldn't even have gone to court at all.