Interesting Links for 27-08-2022

[andrewducker]

1. When the Pope is clearly an end of level boss

(tags:games Pope funny )

2. Synthetic embryo with brain and beating heart grown from mouse cells for first time ever

(tags:mice biology organs )

3. Satellites have identified 21 Russian facilities that are forcibly detaining thousands of Ukrainians, as well as possible mass grave sites

(tags:russia ukraine murder war WarCrimes )

4. Psilocybin-assisted psychotherapy dropped heavy drinking days amongst people with Alcohol Use Disorder from 23% to 9% (compared with placebo-assisted psychotherapy)

(tags:psilocybin hallucinogenics alcohol )

5. Music based on Scotrail announcements goes viral

(tags:music trains scotland )

6. Sweeteners can significantly impair glycemic responses

(tags:blood sugar insulin food taste )

7. A Florida Judge Who Denied A Teen Girl An Abortion Because Of Her Grades Was Voted Out Of Office

Do many countries appoint judges through voting?
(tags:USA law abortion )

8. Socialite, Widow, Jeweller, Spy: How a Russian Agent Charmed Her Way Into NATO Circles in Italy

(tags:Russia Italy spying NATO )

9. Sunak is trying to rewrite history on the Pandemic

(tags:Pandemic conservatives lies )

Comments

#7

[lauradi7dw]

I don't know the answer to your question, but the answer to the question that you didn't ask is that in the US it varies by state (like many things), so in some places judges are appointed and in some they are elected. There are vehement arguments either way - if a corrupt authority appoints a judge and has enough allies in the confirming body, there are very bad judges. See the current make-up of the US Supreme Court for an extreme example. If a corrupt person has enough money to mount a successful campaign, same.

When the Constitution was written in the late 18th century, people were aware enough of the potential for unfair judges that the 6th amendment promises a jury trial. It also promises a speedy trial, which people don't mostly get, but it was an idealized document in some ways

"In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence."

OTOH, after all of the first set January 6th insurrectionists who had a jury trial were found guilty, some of them have been requesting judge-only.

[nancylebov]

From my pal google: "In general, however, approximately half of the States appoint judges and half elect them."

I don't know (and google wasn't helpful) about whether any other countries elect judges.

It does seem to have the virtue commonly attributed to democracy of getting rid of very bad actors. It works sometimes.

#7 Quibble

[lsanderson]

Not to quibble, he said, quibbling, but "appoint" and voting (electing) seem like they come from different headwaters. OTOH, there are hybrid systems that combine the best and worst of both: https://ballotpedia.org/Judicial_selection_in_the_states

[movingfinger]

8. Perhaps male humans are innately unsuited for the responsibilities they grab.

[dewline]

There are days when I share such suspicions.

[channelpenguin]

5. Haha. Me and Saint had that idea back in 1991...”This is Stirling, this is Stirling" lol.

[snippy]

7. Even in places that elect judges, many are nevertheless appointed. E.g., in my state judges are elected and are nominally not partisan (that is, they don't run as Democrats or Republicans). However, retiring judges retire early enough to enable the governor to appoint the successor, and re-election rates are astoundingly high largely due to name recognition.

[andrewducker]

Yeah, political appointments seem awful too.

The UK has the Judicial Appointments Commission who are as independent and transparent as possible. In France they're civil servants who work for the Ministry of Justice. The thought of directly appointing judges because of their political views seems appalling from over here - but then our judges seem to have less freedom than yours do to make sweeping changes, that's in the hands of parliament.