Only 35% of Americans trust the US judicial system. This is catastrophic (www.theguardian.com)

submitted 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

54 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Summary

Trust in the U.S. judicial system has hit a record low, with only 35% of Americans expressing confidence, according to Gallup.

Criticism centers on the Supreme Court’s conservative majority, accused of advancing right-wing agendas, eroding rights like abortion access, and lacking accountability.

This judicial capture, orchestrated by conservative groups like the Federalist Society, ensures Republican dominance in key policies for decades, regardless of future elections.

top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] sumguyonline@lemmy.world 7 points 2 weeks ago

Democrats just pardoned a judge selling kids to jails for cash. I understand he was old, but he should have died in jail from covid, those kids had their lives sold like slaves, we fought a war over people owning slaves for just cash - prison is a form of slavery, but theoretically it should only be used as punishment for guilty, so innocents going to prison is literally an unregulated slave trade. This isn't a "Republican" issue. This is Democrats too. When was the last time you heard about a rich kid getting the same treatment as a poor kid? Or when was the last time you heard about any judge selling warrants to innocent peoples homes, lives, and existences, in order to have the police/feds go searching for illegal material they HOPE is maybe there. If you haven't yet, you will. Pay real close attention to the ethics of judges over the next 5yrs, they are poised to anchor themselves as an unelected ruling class, not just stuffy bastards that don't have touch with the real world, let alone can get their heads far enough out of their ass their nose might get cold. If AI is good for one thing, its replacing judges. End of story. Then, if AI is programmed with hundreds of years of precedent, and each law is coded in to be applied equally, then and only then can we hope the rich bastard drunk driving gets the same as Jo Bob. An that the courts aren't just a playground for the 1% to pay a fee for their crime, while we face cold hard reality. You want us in prison? You rich fucks will be standing right next to us, wearing the same pink jumper, and we hungry. If all the feds can do is investigate you hoping harrasment will get you to commit a crime, they already lost, they just haven't had their asses kicked on the side of the highway to prove it yet. Their 1% masters will be next.

[-] Clinicallydepressedpoochie@lemmy.world 6 points 2 weeks ago

Why would I trust a branch of government who, amoung other things, said; president's rule like kings; money is speech; rulings from the 1600s supercede any modern day interpretation of law.

I wouldn't invite a person like this into my house non the less let them rule a branch of government.

[-] xmunk@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago

Luigi Mangione has a higher favorability than the US justice system.

That's where we're fucking at.

[-] Bakkoda@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 weeks ago

Number of executives held accountable in 2024: 1

[-] Taleya@aussie.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago

Do better in '25

[-] MutilationWave@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

What's his favorability number? I would guess 50% at least.

[-] nwtreeoctopus@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

It's closer to 25% across the board. Younger folks (under 30) have closer to 40%, but the olds are not super stoked on him.

[-] SolarMonkey@slrpnk.net 4 points 2 weeks ago

As I had to explain to my boomers “you worked for the state government long term, and 15 years at a single company, respectively, prior to retirement. You both got into good positions wrt: healthcare coverage. People these days are unable to secure promotion without job hopping, and are subject to rolling layoffs, putting them fully at the mercy of whatever low budget health insurance their new companies decide to use, but additionally, companies are swapping to cheaper plans for new/existing employees to save overall money, meaning what you were offered and what your newer peers were offered was probably not the same before you retired.”

They do not at all get it and they are not into my hype for it. Not a bit.

[-] ochi_chernye@startrek.website 1 points 2 weeks ago

To say nothing of all our other problems, anyone should be able to grasp the idea that the US health insurance industry is inherently evil. They provide and create nothing. It's a whole sector of the economy that exists solely to extract profit by amplifying human suffering and death. It should and must be abolished.

[-] uberdroog@lemmy.world 4 points 2 weeks ago

Dylan Roof kills 9 black people to start a race war. Luigi popped a CEO who was in charge or a system that killed thousands. Which one gets the terrorism charge and why? To send a message, so the serfs don't get uppity. Why would we trust the system? We all know the resources exist, but we still suffer and starve. Fuck the system and fuck the elites.

[-] AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Dylan didn't have to be charged with terrorism to get the death penalty in SC. NY State law requires the terrorism charge to be able to sentence Luigi to the death penalty. It's precisely because Luigi didn't kill a bunch of people that they have to tack on the terrorism charge, but them being so bloodthirsty is very likely to backfire. They could have gotten the 2nd degree murder charge and life in prison, but it's gonna be damn near impossible to find 12 people that will convict beyond a reasonable doubt on terrorism.

Sure it highlights how bloodthirsty these ghouls at the top are, but it may not work for them the way they want it to.

Dylan is currently on death row. Waste of taxpayer money if you ask me. Life in prison with no chance of parole is cheaper by multiple factors.

[-] Makeitstop@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

The terrorism charge also brings his motivation front and center. If it was a 2nd degree murder only, they might have been able to suppress a lot of discussion about UnitedHealth for being irrelevant and prejudicial. But now they not only have to discuss it, but they have to allow the defense to respond to it. If they aren't careful, this could easily open the door to a jury nullification strategy.

[-] Nollij@sopuli.xyz 1 points 2 weeks ago

Jury nullification isn't an official path to be taken. Many judges will slam on the brakes the moment anyone, anyone at all, even hints at it.

Officially, juries are finders of fact. Did he do the actions needed for each charge? If so, then the verdict must be guilty. They are not finders of law; that's for the judges or legislators.

That said, much like determining which degree of a murder charge, whether "he had it coming/he started it" could play a big part in evidence and testimony.

[-] CharlesDarwin@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Maybe catastrophic for democratic norms. But it's perrrrrrfect for fascists and their schemes.

[-] Bonesince1997@lemmy.world 3 points 2 weeks ago

Blatant corruption, even in the highest court, will do that. Get Thomas out of there. Make Trump pay for his crimes. Otherwise, I guess it's plumbing time.

[-] zephorah@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago

It’s not just Thomas, it’s Kavanaugh. Men who behave like rabid dogs around women are not emotionally, mentally, and societally stable enough to hold that position. Or shouldn’t be considered as such, but here we are.

Replace them with republicans if you must, either way, treating half the population as less should disqualify you. But it doesn’t, the fact that Trump ran and won on it proves as much.

It’s difficult to avoid states of learned helplessness, I think, when this is our system. I think that’s another piece of the Luigi effect. Breaking that mentality on a large scale. (That’s not an endorsement, it’s a recognition of the psychological impact of that day.)

[-] Bronzebeard@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago

The US justice system has gone out of its way to make itself not trustworthy. It's surprising it's that high.

[-] LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Well 3 of 9 judges supported putting in codified ethics I believe. So that means I'd think 33% of them were trustworthy. Throw in 2% for the people who answered, yes I trust them.. because they trust them to act in their own best interests, and we got to 35% haha

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

This guy cried about liking beer and he's in charge of the law of the land.

load more comments (3 replies)

[-] perestroika@lemm.ee 3 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

That sounds bad indeed.

Comparison: over here in Estonia, out of the general population, 71% trust the courts (an increase from 55% as measured back in 2013). Out of lawyers, 88% trust the courts here. A bit north of here, in Finland, 83% of the population "think that the courts are independent or very independent" (I failed to find a direct question about trust).

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 2 points 2 weeks ago

I mean y'all also generally dont need to worry so much since if the courts do fuck up, you dont have to worry about being tortured, raped, and murdered in your prisons.

[-] ochi_chernye@startrek.website 2 points 2 weeks ago

Thanks for the perspective!

[-] foggy@lemmy.world 2 points 2 weeks ago

Won't trust it until Trump is in a cell.

There's two justice systems. There's two classes. Until this bullshit ends, it's the same as it ever was.

[-] Granite@midwest.social 2 points 2 weeks ago

Well, it’s kinda like they’ve given us every reason not to…

[-] geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml 2 points 2 weeks ago

35% is far too high.

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago

I still meet people who trust a police officer to have their best interests in mind.

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 2 weeks ago

Are they white & wealthy?

[-] ByteOnBikes@slrpnk.net 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Surprisingly not! Latinos and suburban folks making under 100k.

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

30% lost faith when we prosecuted Trump.

35% lost faith when Trump walked.

Seems to track to me!

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

yeah, different parties. But Luigi appeals to both party's constituents, so during his prosecution the judiciary is at an extra disadvantage. I imagine the government will try to use some sort of secret closed to the public terrorism court for this so they can eliminate the trial of his peers aspect of it. I'd bet real money on it right now, actually

[-] DarkDarkHouse@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 2 weeks ago

I was trying to understand why they laid a terrorism charge, since it raises Luigi's profile when obviously they want to sweep him under the rug. I think you're on to something here.

[-] Drusas@fedia.io 1 points 2 weeks ago

That's my concern and my guess as to why he's been charged with terrorism.

[-] HootinNHollerin@slrpnk.net 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

The Supreme Court is corrupted, so every court in the country is corrupted

[-] sarcasticsunrise@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

For the life of me I'm baffled that's it's as high as 35%

[-] GladiusB@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

Did you see the popular vote?

[-] jagged_circle@feddit.nl 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah I mean that was about 30% of the population, so it tracks

[-] kreskin@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago

Trust in law enforcement has been plummeting for a long time too. Prosecutors are going to have a much harder time convincing a jury of much of anything.

[-] captainlezbian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

That seems high

Listen, citizens united was really bad. And cops engage in highway robbery

[-] Cypher@lemmy.world 0 points 2 weeks ago

When you have judges accepting cash for kids 35% seems outrageously high.

load more comments (11 replies)

[-] allo@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago

i trust them to not have our best interest at heart

load more comments

this post was submitted on 21 Dec 2024

26 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19308 readers

916 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

• Register To Vote

• Citizenship Resource Center

• Congressional Awards Program

• Federal Government Agencies

• Library of Congress Legislative Resources

• The White House

• U.S. House of Representatives

• U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

• News