Personal tools

Argument: Rulings of elected judges are weakened by concerns of bias

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

Parent debate

Supporting quotations

"Should we elect judges?" Belief Net. June 9, 2009: "My honest opinion is that we shouldn't elect judges, period. I know that may surprise some, as it's not a position usually identified with conservatives, but having participated in elections which involve judicial candidates I've come to an inescapable conclusion that electing judges is a bad idea. More:

First, there's that issue of campaign finance and bias. The SCOTUS decision puts greater pressure on judges to excuse themselves when there's the perception that they might be biased in favor of a campaign supporter, a decision I support--yet I think it also creates a new way to nullify a judge's decision; if a losing party to a case can show that a judge received a significant contribution from anyone even associated with the winning party the losing party can point to this decision to demand a new trial. Unlike the kinds of biases for which judges routinely recuse themselves, too, a campaign contribution connection to one of the parties in the case may not be obvious at first; the judge himself might not even know that some subsidiary of one party or other has been a significant donor."

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits