Have you ever felt so overworked that it may be affecting the quality of the outcome? In today’s day and age of our American judicial system, most would agree our judges are overworked. The federal judges of the court system handle a vast number of court cases each year in the United States. It has become directionally proportional between the growing populations, the increase in crime, in turn leading to more cases. There should be a dramatic addition of judges within the federal court system to lower the workload of the justices.
From the signing of the U.S. Constitution under Article III, our founding fathers put power into our third branch of the government. The federal court system was new but becoming organized. It was designed to handle the caseload at that present time which reflected upon the judges. Recently, the federal court system is struggling to keep up with the civil, criminal, bankruptcy and appellate court cases. The justices, law clerks and other personnel who work for the courts have an enormous amount of work and duties before them. Battling the quality of work could be argued due to the quantity being faced. All of this leading to an almost unobtainable caseload. Chief Justice William Rehnquist quoted,
“Some may well note the irony that at a time when all of us are challenged more than ever just to get through our daily workload, we have chosen to develop a strategic vision and think about what we'll have to do in the future. My response is that we cannot escape the future technological, societal, economic, and demographic changes that may challenge conventional assumptions about how the federal courts system does its business. If we don't look over the horizon, and at least have the discipline a...
... middle of paper ...
... may be leaving. Most commonly a federal justice will leave due to insufficient pay or private practice. Lack of acceptable pay or the private practicing may be rooted back to the ratio between pay and work.
As time goes on, more judges will be appointed, many will retire, and some will simply leave their seat on the federal bench for other reasons. The workload seems to become more overwhelming. The appeal of this job seems to be less appealing for the amount of work compared to the profit return in the end. A federal judgeship has two guarantees for the individuals who still seek out this position. It will provide life tenure so as long as the person in the judgeship will reside in “good behavior”. The other guarantee is their yearly income will never decrease. As some may see it, these two guarantees may be pleasing for job security and pay security
Returning to the judicial world of the Bronx Family Court as a judge, after years of working in administration, Judge Richard Ross is astonished to find a distinctly more disjointed situation than the one he left. As he attempts to live out his life as “both the fact finder and arbiter of the law” it is clear the current judicial system does not serve him well (xv). Judge Ross conveys to the reader the fundamental issues of the Family Court system through his day to day happenings which range from endless caseloads to death threats. The use of personal experience is effective in adding credibility to more clearly convey his point that not only the Judges, but the case workers, 18-B attorneys, and various legal aides are overworked to a point
“Corruption is like a ball of snow, once it’s set a rolling it must increase (Charles Caleb Colton).” Colton describes that once corruption has begun, it is difficult to stop. Corruption has existed in this country, let alone this very planet, since the beginning of time. With corruption involves: money, power, and favoritism. Many people argue today that racism is still a major problem to overcome in today’s legal system. American author (and local Chicago resident) Steve Bogira jumps into the center of the United States justice system and tells the story of what happens in a typical year for the Cook Country Criminal Courthouse, which has been noted as one of the most hectic and busiest felony courthouses in the entire country. After getting permission from one of the courthouse judges’ (Judge Locallo) he was allowed to venture in and get eyewitness accounts of what the American Legal System is and how it operates. Not only did he get access to the courtroom but: Locallo’s chambers, staff, even his own home. In this book we get to read first hand account of how America handles issues like: how money and power play in the court, the favoritism towards certain ethnic groups, and the façade that has to be put on by both the defendants and Cook County Workers,
It is simple to be confused by the federal court judges and their decisions and how they go about them and how they are in their position. Personally, I always thought they were elected by the Supreme Court or someone or something higher than them. But I was very surprised to know that they were appointed (assigned a job or role to). This leaves the judges from having to go through a process of campaigning and running against others. Although by being unelected officials it has both pros and cons. Pros being, that they are trusted enough to handle cases that go to this point and being able to make a decision under the law to better the society. Cons being, if a federal court judge makes any misdemeanor or crime they have the ability to be impeached
federal courts: A content analysis based on agency theory. PhD diss., The George Washington University.
People have always been concerned about our judicial system making massive decisions in an undemocratic manner and while there are parts of our nation’s history (Jost). There have been decisions that were dreadful for our nation, Dred Scott v. Sandford; but there are decisions that everyone can agree with in retrospect, Brown v. Board of Education. Also, there are decisions that still divide us as a nation, Bush v. Gore and Roe V. Wade. There are a lot of issues that come from our current judicial system; however, I understand that the problems that come from it are not going to come from any quick fix, and we may have to live with some of them. Looking at the history of the judicial branch of the United States Government, I believe it needs to be limited in its judicial review power, but have certain exceptions where necessary in some cases.
Many judges, whether appointed or elected, tend to serve for life. Often times, once they are in place, then it is very difficult to remove them. The advantage of having judges that are older is for their experience and wisdom. These judges are typically able to make sound judgments. They have obtained a degree of respect from their community and judicial colleagues. If a judge is able to maintain a sound mind and is physically fit to stay on the bench, then there should not be a cause of concern. However, with the aging process, the human body begins to decline. Unfortunately, sound judgment and memory begins to diminish. The body begins to weaken and it becomes increasingly difficult for a judge to keep up with the demand for the job. Often time than not, the judge is the one who decides when he should step down. If he a defiant person, then that decision will be a difficult one for him to make even though his stepping down would be for the betterment of all people. Most judges are able to continue serving even into advanced ages. As long as they are capable, then they should continue to do
What is a democracy? The United Sates president Abraham Lincoln defined democracy as, “Government of the people, by the people, for the people.” (1863). The Oxford dictionary’s definition of democracy states that, “ A system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives” (2015). Democracy plays a vital role in our nation. The citizens of the nation vote for who they believe is the best fit for government. The government appoints individuals to take down roles as cabinets and judges. What is the duty of a judge? The definition used by the Canadian Superior Courts Judges Association (CSCJA) states, “Judges play many roles. They interpret the law, assess the evidence presented,
It is my belief that an unelected judge should have power over decisions regarding the creation and altercation of laws. The issue of whether or not a judge should be a part of the law making process can arise from dialogue theory. Judges have the power to interpret the Charter of Rights and Freedoms when imposing a new law or ruling down on a case. Dialogue theory claims that if a judge uses their own judgement to make rulings it could lead to overlooking long time problems or it might be more influenced on personal gain (Dyzenhaus, David, Arthur Ripstein, and Sofia Reibetanz Moreau 592). In fact giving unelected judges this ability allows them to make laws based on the charter being enforced or even differentiate from it if the case requires, a judge must also provide logical explanation behind everything they choose to impose and through these changes it can actually lead to very positive differences in our society. Although unelected judges have to make very controversial and moral decisions, with the combination of the charter of rights and freedoms and their own reasoning they are a crucial part of any nations growth.
Proverbs 21:15 New Living Translation (NLT) states, “Justice is a joy to the godly, but it terrifies evildoers.” With that being said, there are “94 district courts, 13 circuit courts, and one Supreme Court throughout the country.” The court systems are not in place to be abused by the representative nor those that are looking for assistance. The court systems exist to provide justice for all.
Oct 1993. Retrieved November 18, 2010. Vol. 79. 134 pages (Document ID: 0747-0088) Published by American Bar Association
Remy, Richard C., Gary E. Clayton, and John J. Patrick. "Supreme Court Cases." Civics Today. Columbus, Ohio: Glencoe, 2008. 796. Print.
The American Court System is an important part of American history and one of the many assets that makes America stand out from other countries. It thrives for justice through its structured and organized court systems. The structures and organizations are widely influenced by both the State and U.S Constitution. The courts have important characters that used their knowledge and roles to aim for equality and justice. These court systems have been influenced since the beginning of the United State of America. Today, these systems and law continue to change and adapt in order to keep and protect the peoples’ rights.
Columbia Law Review, 104, 1-20. doi:10.2307/4099343. Reynolds, S. (2009). The 'Standard'. An interview with Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
Judicial officers are afforded tremendous amounts of discretion in the execution of their duties. With this discretion comes an insurmountable amount of responsibility to exercise it with care, as a judicial officer’s decisions have life impacting results on those who they exercise their discretion upon. It is also very important that judges make ethical decisions and recuse themselves from cases in which their discretion may be compromised by personal bias in favor of any particular party they are presiding over. Knowing when, and having the fortitude to recuse themselves is often the key decision to make to prevent the crossing of any ethical boundaries. Judges, being the highest level with the most authority within the criminal justice system, are especially entrusted with the use of their discretion. Historically, there is little consequence to judges who exercise their discretion poorly or unethically in the carrying out of their duties.
In particular, Gallas-himself a former court administrator-thinks that what judges and administrators do within courts is insufficient to explain case processing differences; as he states it, the "local legal culture pervades the practice of law and the processing of c...