3 ms·

The system seems to be working just fine. The justice system interprets law as enacted by the legislature. This is the balance of power. The governor can sti

by mulmen 4y ago

The system seems to be working just fine. The justice system interprets law as enacted by the legislature. This is the balance of power. The governor can still issue a pardon to stop the execution because it is the executive's job to enforce the law. The legislature can change the law to avoid this situation in the future. The solution here isn't to give judges absolute power.

giantg2 4y ago
Dear God, in what world is the current system "fine". 2-10% of the incarcerated population is innocent. My own minor experiences with the courts has uncovered extreme incompetence on even minor issues, and a system that grants judges damn near the absolute power you mention. There's practically no oversight and the system is designed to hide mistakes and misconduct (judicial review boards). "The solution here isn't to give judges absolute power." It's seems all parties are on board - defense, prosecution, etc, so it would not be absolute power.
- mulmen 4y ago
  There is already a remedy here. The executive can simply decide not to go through with the execution. There's no benefit to allowing judges to selectively interpret the law. The price of that precedent is too high. If you think the justice system already makes poor decisions (I agree) then the solution is certainly not to give judges even more power.
  - giantg2 4y ago
    "There's not benefit to allowing judges to selectively interpret the law." I agree, but they already do. When the entirety of the system has failed and it's down to the executive, that's a problem. We want a system that's fail-safe, not fail-fatal.
    - mulmen 4y ago
      The entirety of the system hasn't failed though. The legislature can still change the law and the executive can still refuse to enforce the death penalty. And to top it off the judicial has refused to overstep their bounds.
      - giantg2 4y ago
        Yeah... in only one of the many cases. How about the ones that aren't national news?

by mulmen 4y ago

giantg2 4y ago

Dear God, in what world is the current system "fine". 2-10% of the incarcerated population is innocent. My own minor experiences with the courts has uncovered extreme incompetence on even minor issues, and a system that grants judges damn near the absolute power you mention. There's practically no oversight and the system is designed to hide mistakes and misconduct (judicial review boards). "The solution here isn't to give judges absolute power." It's seems all parties are on board - defense, prosecution, etc, so it would not be absolute power.

mulmen 4y ago
There is already a remedy here. The executive can simply decide not to go through with the execution. There's no benefit to allowing judges to selectively interpret the law. The price of that precedent is too high. If you think the justice system already makes poor decisions (I agree) then the solution is certainly not to give judges even more power.
- giantg2 4y ago
  "There's not benefit to allowing judges to selectively interpret the law." I agree, but they already do. When the entirety of the system has failed and it's down to the executive, that's a problem. We want a system that's fail-safe, not fail-fatal.
  - mulmen 4y ago
    The entirety of the system hasn't failed though. The legislature can still change the law and the executive can still refuse to enforce the death penalty. And to top it off the judicial has refused to overstep their bounds.
    - giantg2 4y ago
      Yeah... in only one of the many cases. How about the ones that aren't national news?