• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:04
CEST 01:04
KST 08:04
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202547RSL Season 1 - Final Week9[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams4Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 Jim claims he and Firefly were involved in match-fixing RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread RSL Season 1 - Final Week The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava
Brood War
General
Ginuda's JaeDong Interview Series BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ ASL20 Preliminary Maps BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion
Tourneys
CSL Xiamen International Invitational [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [CSLPRO] It's CSLAN Season! - Last Chance [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Nintendo Switch Thread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 586 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 2264

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 19:59:34
September 03 2015 19:55 GMT
#45261
On September 04 2015 04:41 Danglars wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 03:19 Plansix wrote:
I find the entire analogy to be sort of silly since the main goal of violating the law was to start the discussion about gay marriage and work through the process in the court and political system. His intent was clear and the people who lived in the city supported it.

This case is a clear example of someone pushing against a solved ruled upon issue, like a Governor standing in-front of a public school with a fire ax.

Mayor violates law, but you agree that the law is bad, therefore it's "start[ing] a discussion" and a clear goal of a court process (???). It sounds like you're advocating judicial immunity for unpopular laws and the supremacy of courts over legislative process. I'm constantly reminded how much of this reduces to faith in justices to govern and outright rejection of government by the people. How easy you find it to whitewash activists that agitate for your preferred direction of social change.

I never have faith in the majority to provide minorities with basic human rights. History has proven over and over that doesn't happen. The south didn't get desegregated without the court forcing it to happen. Same with this. This issue was never going to be resolved by the political process because one side was passing laws to outlaw gay marriage, even if it was issued from another state, and those were always going to be challenged in the federal court.

And I am constantly reminded that some people would let others be treated second-class-citizens until the public got together and decided they could be equal.

On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


John Adams used the phrase tyranny of the majority for a reason. Its why they created the Judicial Branch.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 03 2015 19:56 GMT
#45262
U.S. Sen. Cory Booker will vote in favor of the nuclear deal with Iran.

New Jersey’s junior Democratic senator announced his position Thursday afternoon in a 3,395-word essay after “hours and hours” of study, saying sanctions have “only delayed — not blocked — Iran’s potential nuclear breakout.”

“We have now passed a point of no return that we should have never reached, leaving our nation to choose between two imperfect, dangerous and uncertain options. Left with these two choices, I nonetheless believe it is better to support a deeply flawed deal, for the alternative is worse,” Booker wrote. “Thus, I will vote in support of the deal. But the United States must recognize that to make this deal work, we must be more vigilant than ever in fighting Iranian aggression.”

His position marks a break from his state's senior senator, Robert Menendez, who announced his opposition to the deal last month.

Booker’s vote became less critical Wednesday when Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland announced her support for the Iran deal, becoming the key 34th vote needed to ensure that Senate could not override a veto of an effort to cancel the deal. However, President Barack Obama needs 41 votes in the Senate to support a filibuster that could keep such a bill from reaching his desk.

Booker has faced more pressure than anyone in New Jersey’s congressional delegation over Iran. Despite his long — if at times rocky — alliance with Obama, he represents one of the state’s most heavily Jewish states, filled with activists both for and against the measure. He’s faced calls from J Street to support it, from Gov. Chris Christie and his longtime friend Rabbi Shmuley Boteach to oppose it. Former Sen. Joseph Lieberman is in Livingston on Thursday night to speak out against the deal, at an event that was billed as an appeal to Booker.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 20:23:48
September 03 2015 20:23 GMT
#45263
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21666 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 20:41:33
September 03 2015 20:41 GMT
#45264
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
September 03 2015 20:47 GMT
#45265
Term limits for the Senate first. And Cruz loves to promise things to his base that he can never deliver on.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
September 03 2015 20:47 GMT
#45266
Aid groups and at least 14 senators have called on the US government to take in thousands more Syrian refugees by the end of 2016, recommending at least five times more than the approximately 1,500 Washington has admitted since the conflict began in 2011.

Despite the US being considered a leader in providing in humanitarian aid, the number of Syrian refugees it is set to admit pales in comparison to the 800,000 people German chancellor Angela Merkel has said Germany will take in this year.

Shannon Scribner, humanitarian policy manager at Oxfam America, said the most useful approach would be for world governments to find a political solution to the crisis in Syria, but since that is not expected any time soon, the organization is pushing for the US to resettle 70,000 Syrian refugees.

The group is also pushing for donors, including the US, to increase the amount of funding they are sending to the World Food Programme, which only has enough money to aid Syria and Lebanon until the end of September. “This is not going to go away any time soon, and what we are hearing from refugees in both Lebanon and Syria is that people are seeing their children becoming increasingly more hungry,” Scribner said.

Oxfam America and other aid groups believe the US also needs to expedite itsresettlement process, while pressuring other communities to accept more refugees.

A State Department official told the Guardian that the US “is committed to maintaining a robust refugee admissions program, and is particularly aware of the needs of the Syrian refugee population”.

The US has admitted approximately 1,500 Syrian refugees since the beginning of the civil war there in 2011, mostly within the last fiscal year. Since April, the number of admitted refugees has more than doubled from an estimate of 700.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
September 03 2015 20:55 GMT
#45267
I'm aware of that introvert, though I'd say it's not just used to say you gotta keep an eye on them (even though you really need to keep even more of an eye on the elected people) but to imply that they are less worthy/appropriate to be making such decisions.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Toadesstern
Profile Blog Joined October 2008
Germany16350 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 20:56:18
September 03 2015 20:55 GMT
#45268
Clerk Rejects Proposal to Let Deputies Issue Marriage Licenses
ASHLAND, Ky. — A defiant county clerk rejected a proposal that would have allowed her deputies to grant same-sex marriage licenses, hours after she was sent to jail by a federal judge for disobeying a court order.
Through her lawyer, the clerk, Kim Davis of Rowan County, said she would not agree to allow the licenses to be issued under her authority as county clerk. Had she consented, the judge would have considered releasing her from custody.

Five of the six deputies have told Judge David L. Bunning of Federal District Court that that they will issue the licenses, though some of them said they would do so reluctantly. The lone holdout was Ms. Davis’s son, Nathan.
[...]
Lawyers for the same-sex couples seeking licenses had asked Judge Bunning to fine Ms. Davis and not send her to jail, but the judge said he thought that a fine would not be enough to prompt the clerk’s compliance.

source

this stuff is getting funny
<Elem> >toad in charge of judging lewdness <Elem> how bad can it be <Elem> also wew, that is actually p lewd.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
September 03 2015 20:56 GMT
#45269
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 21:02:16
September 03 2015 21:00 GMT
#45270
On September 04 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.

Elected judges a terrible idea at most levels. Especially for the highest court where they are supposed to overturn laws created by popular demand. I could see appointing new ones after 8-12 year terms. But I also think the stability of the Supreme Court is a boon for the government. Having a branch that is basically immune to the whims of public opinion and the politics of the moment has a place in the system.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
September 03 2015 21:01 GMT
#45271
Term limits sound nice in principle; but in practice they don't tend to actually improve the situation much, if at all, from the analyses I've read. What have you heard of their effects in practice?
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 21:07:43
September 03 2015 21:03 GMT
#45272
On September 04 2015 06:00 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.

Elected judges a terrible idea at most levels. Especially for the highest court where they are supposed to overturn laws created by popular demand.


A retention election by the Senate is not the same thing, though it's still not my favorite idea. Though personally I would just limit them to a term of some number of years. It would also spread the appointment process out among presidents. Except for deaths, every president would be able to appoint 1-2 justices (per cycle or not).

Edit: I agree with the stability argument, which is why I would make the terms on the longer side. It's an interesting idea, at least.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
September 03 2015 21:04 GMT
#45273
On September 04 2015 06:01 zlefin wrote:
Term limits sound nice in principle; but in practice they don't tend to actually improve the situation much, if at all, from the analyses I've read. What have you heard of their effects in practice?


What analyses are you talking about? Are you referring to other countries, or something that looks at state houses?
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Plansix
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States60190 Posts
September 03 2015 21:06 GMT
#45274
On September 04 2015 06:03 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:00 Plansix wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.

Elected judges a terrible idea at most levels. Especially for the highest court where they are supposed to overturn laws created by popular demand.


A retention election by the Senate is not the same thing, though it's still not my favorite idea. Though personally I would just limit them to a term of some number of years. It would also spread the appointment process out among presidents. Except for deaths, every president would be able to appoint 1-2 justices.

I can't agreed. I don't like the highest court being swayed in any way by public opinion. 1-2 Judges every 4 years is to much and makes everyone thinking about how to stack the bench.
I have the Honor to be your Obedient Servant, P.6
TL+ Member
zlefin
Profile Blog Joined October 2012
United States7689 Posts
September 03 2015 21:08 GMT
#45275
On September 04 2015 06:04 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:01 zlefin wrote:
Term limits sound nice in principle; but in practice they don't tend to actually improve the situation much, if at all, from the analyses I've read. What have you heard of their effects in practice?


What analyses are you talking about? Are you referring to other countries, or something that looks at state houses?

It's been a long time so I can't remember the names of the analyses, or which, if any were academic vs reporting based; they mostly looked at state houses I think. Either way the question stands of course.
Great read: http://shorensteincenter.org/news-coverage-2016-general-election/ great book on democracy: http://press.princeton.edu/titles/10671.html zlefin is grumpier due to long term illness. Ignoring some users.
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21666 Posts
September 03 2015 21:09 GMT
#45276
On September 04 2015 05:55 Toadesstern wrote:
Show nested quote +
Clerk Rejects Proposal to Let Deputies Issue Marriage Licenses
ASHLAND, Ky. — A defiant county clerk rejected a proposal that would have allowed her deputies to grant same-sex marriage licenses, hours after she was sent to jail by a federal judge for disobeying a court order.
Through her lawyer, the clerk, Kim Davis of Rowan County, said she would not agree to allow the licenses to be issued under her authority as county clerk. Had she consented, the judge would have considered releasing her from custody.

Five of the six deputies have told Judge David L. Bunning of Federal District Court that that they will issue the licenses, though some of them said they would do so reluctantly. The lone holdout was Ms. Davis’s son, Nathan.
[...]
Lawyers for the same-sex couples seeking licenses had asked Judge Bunning to fine Ms. Davis and not send her to jail, but the judge said he thought that a fine would not be enough to prompt the clerk’s compliance.

source

this stuff is getting funny

So what is the next step after getting jailed for Contempt?
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
Introvert
Profile Joined April 2011
United States4748 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 21:14:24
September 03 2015 21:09 GMT
#45277
On September 04 2015 06:06 Plansix wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:03 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:00 Plansix wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.

Elected judges a terrible idea at most levels. Especially for the highest court where they are supposed to overturn laws created by popular demand.


A retention election by the Senate is not the same thing, though it's still not my favorite idea. Though personally I would just limit them to a term of some number of years. It would also spread the appointment process out among presidents. Except for deaths, every president would be able to appoint 1-2 justices.

I can't agreed. I don't like the highest court being swayed in any way by public opinion. 1-2 Judges every 4 years is to much and makes everyone thinking about how to stack the bench.


If there is are 3 justices quitting, then that is 3 by a president and has just as great an impact. Like I said, it's an idea I like but not adamant on. I'd much rather term limits for Congress first and foremost.


On September 04 2015 06:08 zlefin wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:04 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:01 zlefin wrote:
Term limits sound nice in principle; but in practice they don't tend to actually improve the situation much, if at all, from the analyses I've read. What have you heard of their effects in practice?


What analyses are you talking about? Are you referring to other countries, or something that looks at state houses?

It's been a long time so I can't remember the names of the analyses, or which, if any were academic vs reporting based; they mostly looked at state houses I think. Either way the question stands of course.



I was hoping you had something, cause it's been a while since I did any digging on the topic. I think though most studies evaluate the partisan effects (i.e. party change for a seat) but I don't think that's the end all be all anyway. I don't know how you would evaluate the change of person, or how it would keep some from sticking around in government too long. I think the intellectual argument for term limits is strong.

On September 04 2015 06:11 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:09 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:06 Plansix wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:03 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:00 Plansix wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.

Elected judges a terrible idea at most levels. Especially for the highest court where they are supposed to overturn laws created by popular demand.


A retention election by the Senate is not the same thing, though it's still not my favorite idea. Though personally I would just limit them to a term of some number of years. It would also spread the appointment process out among presidents. Except for deaths, every president would be able to appoint 1-2 justices.

I can't agreed. I don't like the highest court being swayed in any way by public opinion. 1-2 Judges every 4 years is to much and makes everyone thinking about how to stack the bench.


If there is are 3 justices quitting, then that is 3 by a president and has just as great an impact. Like I said, it's an idea I like but not adamant on. I'd much rather term limits for Congress first and foremost.

That everyone but Congress can agree with a term limit on them :p


There are two ways to amend the Constitution, but only one ever gets used. It would take quite the effort to get the states to do it on their own.
"It is therefore only at the birth of a society that one can be completely logical in the laws. When you see a people enjoying this advantage, do not hasten to conclude that it is wise; think rather that it is young." -Alexis de Tocqueville
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21666 Posts
September 03 2015 21:11 GMT
#45278
On September 04 2015 06:09 Introvert wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:06 Plansix wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:03 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 06:00 Plansix wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:56 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:41 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:23 Introvert wrote:
On September 04 2015 04:55 zlefin wrote:
Lately I've heard a fair number of complaints about "unelected judges." I'm not referring necessarily to what danglars just said (that simply reminded me of this), but more generally its something I've heard from a variety of sources.
As an empirical observation, the approval ratings of the unelected justices of the Supreme court is consistently higher than that of Congress. The analyses I've seen that compare the performance of elected judges vs appointed judges found appointed judges to be better on average (less corrupt, better performance views by the community, less misconduct).
I suspect people have a knee-jerk pro-democracy reaction, that things should be done by vote, regardless of whether those specific things tend to actually turn out more to their satisfaction through voting. All forms of governments have strengths and weaknesses, and most people probably aren't properly aware of the weaknesses in democracy (as typically practiced), so that may be why they default to saying do it through elected people, even though that may be demonstrably inferior.


Most of the time the phrase "unelected judges" isn't used to advocate for judicial elections. It's to point out that their power and reach should be carefully watched and managed, since they are appointed and very hard to remove. I don't know anyone who says that the Supreme Court should be nationally elected, for instance.

Cruz does :p

www.washingtonpost.com


That's not the same thing. And I favor term limits for all branches. Rotation is good.

Elected judges a terrible idea at most levels. Especially for the highest court where they are supposed to overturn laws created by popular demand.


A retention election by the Senate is not the same thing, though it's still not my favorite idea. Though personally I would just limit them to a term of some number of years. It would also spread the appointment process out among presidents. Except for deaths, every president would be able to appoint 1-2 justices.

I can't agreed. I don't like the highest court being swayed in any way by public opinion. 1-2 Judges every 4 years is to much and makes everyone thinking about how to stack the bench.


If there is are 3 justices quitting, then that is 3 by a president and has just as great an impact. Like I said, it's an idea I like but not adamant on. I'd much rather term limits for Congress first and foremost.

That everyone but Congress can agree with a term limit on them :p
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
ticklishmusic
Profile Blog Joined August 2011
United States15977 Posts
September 03 2015 21:12 GMT
#45279
On September 04 2015 06:09 Gorsameth wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 05:55 Toadesstern wrote:
Clerk Rejects Proposal to Let Deputies Issue Marriage Licenses
ASHLAND, Ky. — A defiant county clerk rejected a proposal that would have allowed her deputies to grant same-sex marriage licenses, hours after she was sent to jail by a federal judge for disobeying a court order.
Through her lawyer, the clerk, Kim Davis of Rowan County, said she would not agree to allow the licenses to be issued under her authority as county clerk. Had she consented, the judge would have considered releasing her from custody.

Five of the six deputies have told Judge David L. Bunning of Federal District Court that that they will issue the licenses, though some of them said they would do so reluctantly. The lone holdout was Ms. Davis’s son, Nathan.
[...]
Lawyers for the same-sex couples seeking licenses had asked Judge Bunning to fine Ms. Davis and not send her to jail, but the judge said he thought that a fine would not be enough to prompt the clerk’s compliance.

source

this stuff is getting funny

So what is the next step after getting jailed for Contempt?


Crowdfund
Speaking tour
Book deal
Fade into obscurity, except for occasional tweets and public appearances
(╯°□°)╯︵ ┻━┻
KwarK
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States42646 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-09-03 21:31:49
September 03 2015 21:31 GMT
#45280
On September 04 2015 06:12 ticklishmusic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On September 04 2015 06:09 Gorsameth wrote:
On September 04 2015 05:55 Toadesstern wrote:
Clerk Rejects Proposal to Let Deputies Issue Marriage Licenses
ASHLAND, Ky. — A defiant county clerk rejected a proposal that would have allowed her deputies to grant same-sex marriage licenses, hours after she was sent to jail by a federal judge for disobeying a court order.
Through her lawyer, the clerk, Kim Davis of Rowan County, said she would not agree to allow the licenses to be issued under her authority as county clerk. Had she consented, the judge would have considered releasing her from custody.

Five of the six deputies have told Judge David L. Bunning of Federal District Court that that they will issue the licenses, though some of them said they would do so reluctantly. The lone holdout was Ms. Davis’s son, Nathan.
[...]
Lawyers for the same-sex couples seeking licenses had asked Judge Bunning to fine Ms. Davis and not send her to jail, but the judge said he thought that a fine would not be enough to prompt the clerk’s compliance.

source

this stuff is getting funny

So what is the next step after getting jailed for Contempt?


Crowdfund
Speaking tour
Book deal
Fade into obscurity, except for occasional tweets and public appearances

One Nation Under God: My struggle to defend the sanctity of marriage available in a book store near you
ModeratorThe angels have the phone box
Prev 1 2262 2263 2264 2265 2266 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 10h 56m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Nathanias 226
Nina 163
ViBE57
StarCraft: Brood War
Sexy 36
Bale 5
Dota 2
monkeys_forever679
Counter-Strike
Fnx 1299
taco 300
Foxcn292
Super Smash Bros
Liquid`Ken76
Other Games
summit1g9966
tarik_tv9010
Grubby2531
C9.Mang0214
Day[9].tv107
Maynarde106
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick741
BasetradeTV34
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• davetesta83
• Hupsaiya 41
• RyuSc2 35
• musti20045 35
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
StarCraft: Brood War
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22743
League of Legends
• Doublelift3983
Other Games
• imaqtpie1154
• Scarra1094
• Shiphtur216
• Day9tv107
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
10h 56m
Reynor vs Zoun
Solar vs SHIN
Classic vs ShoWTimE
Cure vs Rogue
Esports World Cup
1d 11h
CranKy Ducklings
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
CSO Cup
2 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
2 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
Sparkling Tuna Cup
5 days
[ Show More ]
Online Event
5 days
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #1
ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.