320
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
320 points (96.0% liked)
politics
19104 readers
1971 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
This seems like a pretty stupid system, honestly - when the composition of the court changes there should be a new election, fixed terms for chief justices that overlap an election for another seat make no sense.
EDIT: apparently this was a recent change, in a referendum, replacing a previous system where they conservatives were stuck with a liberal chief they didn't like; from Wikipedia:
So they literally passed a referendum to fix the problem of the chief justice not matching the politics of the majority, and now they're mad that the liberal justices are trying to fix the same problem again.
I'm not so sure that's accurate. In the article you've got someone hired by the Liberal Majority taking over the work of the Chief Justice, who did not agree to it, and then signing legal documents appointing new Judges with the Chief Justice's name.
Sure, fuck Republicans, but that sounds super shady to me.
Your reading comprehension needs work:
firing and hiring a new state court director was illegal and ordered interim state court director Audrey Skwierawski to stop signing orders without her knowledge or approval.
The court director always signs with the chief justices name. That's how it works.
The liberal majority replaced the director as is within their power. Ziegler can't stop them so she's throwing a tantrum and saying the new director can't use her name... Ziegler has no standing to demand this. There is nothing inappropriate here. Ziegler is just mad she can't run the show anymore.
She stole the chief justice position from the former chief anyway when the cons took the majority last time so if anything this is her comeuppance.
it's a pretty stupid system because judges are elected by politicians, period. In other countries the justice is completely independent - for example in Italy (were we still have a lot of different issues) judges are elected by their peers.
The Wisconsin state supreme court is elected by the citizens of the state (source: I voted for Protasiewicz in the last election)
Its a bit wierd here. Some are appointed and some are elected and judicial retention is a ballot item. The thing about elections is the general populace do not have much to go by so your system sounds better. For example I lean heavily on various bar association recommendations for my vote. Luckily in most cases the bar associations are in agreement and when they are not its someone to look into.