Immigration judges illegally chosen and seated?

Discussion in 'Et Cetera, Et Cetera' started by DC_DEEP, Jun 11, 2007.

  1. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    No big surprises here. I'm only quoting the first paragraph... the article isn't massive, but too long for me to put the details in here, so I'll post a link to the story. Enjoy!

    Immigration Judges Often Picked Based On GOP Ties
    Law Forbids Practice; Courts Being Reshaped

    By Amy Goldstein and Dan Eggen
    Washington Post Staff Writers
    Monday, June 11, 2007; Page A01


    The Bush administration increasingly emphasized partisan political ties over expertise in recent years in selecting the judges who decide the fate of hundreds of thousands of immigrants, despite laws that preclude such considerations, according to an analysis by The Washington Post.

    more of the story:

    Since immigration has been in the news (and in LPSG threads) so much lately, this is especially interesting.
     
  2. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    Another chink in the armour of an independent Judiciary.

    Next!
     
  3. B_big dirigible

    B_big dirigible New Member

    Joined:
    Dec 27, 2005
    Messages:
    2,739
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes, judges should be appointed by Divine Intervention. Oracular divinations based on portents seen in the heavens would do, should the Almighty slack off on the supply of suitable signs. Or perhaps the editors of the Washington Post could do the job; they're independent and nonpartisan - just ask them, they'll tell you so. Maybe some party which doesn't control any branch of any American government should appoint judges - the America First Party, the American Nazi Party (yes, there is one - go, First Amendment!), the Christian Falangist Party (yep, we have one of those too), the Light Party, the Family Values Party, the Libertarian Party, the Prohibition Party, or maybe the Revolutionary Communist Party. That would certainly end the perpetual whining about our judges coming exclusively from the ranks of the Republican or Democratic faithful. Or another country entirely could do the honors - France, or Venezuela, or Zimbabwe, or Cuba might do us the favor of appointing our independent judges, ideally by filling the offices with foreigners. The possibilities are endless - the paltry claim by the Post that judgeships should be political plums strewn before civil service drones seems unnecessarily stultified.
     
  4. Dr. Dilznick

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2005
    Messages:
    1,662
    Likes Received:
    1
    Off-topic, but I am surprised LPSGers don't focus on the fact that they were going to remove a good attorney and install one of Rove's butt buddies in Arkansas, precisely so he could start digging up dirt on Hillary during the '08 campaign.
     
  5. Gillette

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2006
    Messages:
    8,309
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    14
    Gender:
    Female
    Location:
    Nova Scotia
    Cripes! I hadn't heard that.

    Sounds like the subject of a hot new thread if you've got a link for us.
     
  6. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    Don't be such an twit. You're far smarter than that mindless drivel above.

    Or, are you seriously suggesting that blatant population of an at least 'nominally' independent judiciary with political hacks is a good thing, that it should be allowed to happen without question on the grounds that all alternative selection means must be chosen from the above?
     
  7. Mr. Snakey

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    24,702
    Likes Received:
    25
    My friend this is normal. If it were Clinton he would fill it with people he seemed fit. You know nothing of our country and take every chance to question it. Whatever Mud Hut you live in please stay there. Big D gave you his opinion on the matter and you had to attack him.
     
  8. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    Of course it is.:rolleyes: But that doesn't make it right, or that it should be allowed to pass unquestioned or do you disagree? Or, do you simply feel that right or wrong I don't have a right on the subject..and if so on what grounds?

    Don't worry about BD's 'feelings' he knows what I meant and doesn't need you to defend him. Though as it happens, in the context of attacking, perhaps you should look in the mirror. I'd lend you mine, but I don't have one in my mud hut based Orwellian nighmare.:rolleyes:

    I freely admit (and have done so many times) I know less about 'your country' than many here, though based on some of the drivel I sometimes read here I believe know more than some. After all, an independent judiciary is hardly a unique aspiration of the US, is it? I was addressing BD because I though his comments were frivolous but the same principles apply to many nations, my own included, or do you think a blatantly politicised judiciary is a good thing?

    Actually, as it happens, one or two of my relatives do live in mud huts, or as near as would make no difference to you I'm sure. I'd wager they're wiser than either of us when it comes to things that really matter.

    When I next see them, I'll ask what they think of your evident opinion of them based on their choice of dwelling shall I? Try to see things as they exist beyond your own borders once in a while You might be surprised what you might learn.
     
  9. Mr. Snakey

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2006
    Messages:
    24,702
    Likes Received:
    25
    What is the interest? Thats what i dont understand. Bid D was right on the money. Yes he can take care of himself just fine. This whole one world goverment in Europe is shocking to many of us over here. The number 1 baby name in England by next year will be Mohamed. The population rate the highest its been in 26 years. The only reason i bring this up is you continue to question our way of life. Normally i feel i dont have the right to question how they live in another country. I have on top my fireplace pictures of our presidents. Bush, Clinton, Regan etc. Among the world leaders are Tony Blair, Churchill, Margeret thatcher. In my heart i feel so sad for the path they and most of Europe have chosen. I want to say something. Then i cant because i must show respect for them and the leaders have chosen. So i support their way of life and wont question how they live. Tony Blair is coming here and you will see how he is loved even more than the queen.:smile:
     
  10. kalipygian

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2005
    Messages:
    1,982
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    35
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    alaska
    The process here in Alaska is that there is an independant Judicial Council (lawyers, of course) who thoroughly evaluate individuals interested in a state judgeship, and when there is a vacancy, provide usually about three nominees to the governor, who makes the appointment. It seems to work, the judicial branch here is competent and respected. Periodically the judges are on the general election ballot for retention. The governor cannot appoint incompetent cronies, which the previous one would certainly have liked to have done, and W. has certainly done.

    Blair looks decent contrasted with W., I don't know if he has really earned much respect. How about one of the Britts here start a 'Tony Legacy ?' thread?
     
  11. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    Throw in a couple of chortles, and you'll sound just like jqblonde.

    Obviously, whomever is making the appointments is going to favor their buddies. That's not a problem if they are appointing buddies who actually qualify for the position. It is a problem if the best they can dredge up to nominate for tax judges are tax attorneys who have been caught cheating on their tax returns, or the best they can dredge up to nominate for immigration judges have never had any experience in immigration law. Nor would it hurt anything for an occasional defense lawyer to be nominated for a judiciary position. You are (supposedly) smarter than that. Your sarcasm missed the mark, and is not flattering toward yourself. I should have known that regardless of the topic, you will praise republicans and slam democrats.
    I did, actually, within a month after it happened.
     
  12. SpeedoGuy

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2004
    Messages:
    4,229
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    10
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Pacific Northwest, USA
    Its off topic, but he has since resigned to move on to a more lucrative job in private practice.
     
  13. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    Where do you get your 'facts' from?

    This whole one world goverment in Europe is shocking to many of us over here.

    Please, explain the basis of such 'shock'.

    The population rate the highest its been in 26 years.

    Yes, but you conveniently neglected to mention that five years prior to today it had been at an all time LOW. Also, you neglected to mention that the latest high is skewed due to a surge in immigration. Are you suggesting a Chinese policy or that immigrants should be sterilised? (yes, I'm kidding).

    That aside, the relevance of UK birth rates to US judicial independence is......?

    The number 1 baby name in England by next year will be Mohamed.

    Yes, I read that too. But Look behind the headline and you'll see that it's more because of a growth in Muslim couples having babies rather than a fundemental shift in preference. And even if it was, what of it? It's a fine name.

    I have to say, for you to mention it so specifically there seems to be an implied racial connotation to your comment, am I missing something, or is is just a nugget you googled up?

    But, again, the relevance being....?

    Normally i feel i dont have the right to question how they live in another country

    I wasn't criticising how you (you as in Americans) live your lives I was making a statement about the potential dangers of a politicised judiciary, in response to a post in a public forum! If you can't make the distinction between that and thinking I was attacking your lifestyle personally or the 'American way of life' then tell me, what can I do to make it clearer?

    What is the interest? Thats what i dont understand.

    What happens in the US can and often does affect me, and US immigration policy has affected people I care about, on seemingly arbitrary and racially motivated grounds. So, yes I believe that gives me a right to comment, if you don't agree then...well, I don't really care about that.

    I have on top my fireplace pictures of our presidents. Bush, Clinton, Regan etc.

    Nice. The relevance to the OP?

    Among the world leaders are Tony Blair, Churchill, Margeret thatcher.

    Blair for about 2 weeks more, Churchill is dead and buried and Thatcher ceased to have what little meaningful impact she had on world politics over ten years ago. Actually, it was some time before that but never mind.

    In my heart i feel so sad for the path they and most of Europe have chosen. I want to say something. Then i cant because i must show respect for them and the leaders have chosen

    Don't be sad, if you want to say something, do it, comment all you want, criticise all you want. Don't stay quiet out of 'respect' or to play Mr. Nice Guy. Above all, don't suggest I can't comment negatively on something because you don't feel it's 'your place' to do so and then expect to apply that standard to me. If I see something I think is questionable I'll call it, shouldn't we all do that?

    Tony Blair is coming here and you will see how he is loved even more than the queen.

    You've said that once already some while back and it's nice for him that he's loved somewhere. But, didn't you notice? - He's been and gone.:rolleyes:

    Uncut, I like you, I always have and no doubt you're a decent, honest guy. I like to think am I too and I have no personal grudge with you at all. All I'm asking is that you respect my right to express my opinion, it's my birthright.

    Disagree with me all you want, I'll debate with you as much as you like but don't use the argument that because you won't say it, I shouldn't either. On me at least, it's doomed to failure.:biggrin1:

    DC, sorry for hijacking your thread.....
     
  14. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
  15. Lex

    Lex
    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 11, 2004
    Messages:
    9,536
    Likes Received:
    16
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    In Your Darkest Thoughts and Dreams
    This is exactly the point. Nominate your firends who are QUALIFIED. That I can live with, regardless of who is doing it.

    ...
    I love it when the higher-order trolls out themselves. Makes for good comedy.

    Them are bad and stoopid. Us am good. Whatever.
     
  16. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
    The only reason the Republicans don't have qualified judges to fill those positions is because the Democrats had them filled with their own people back in the day, who back then were themselves unqualified for the positions. The only difference is that a large segment of Republicans are viscerally haters while Democrats don't have that large demographic.

    The one thing I don't trust above all else in the judicial system is the Republican D.A. They are dangerous because they think they are more the 'thinkers' than they really are. I love it when anyone of them is confronted with an evident miscarriage of justice they helped preside over. They will deny the facts to the end. Sad really. Democrats will actually say sorry we made a mistake (in a fashion).
     
  17. B_spiker067

    B_spiker067 New Member

    Joined:
    Nov 17, 2006
    Messages:
    2,189
    Likes Received:
    0
  18. DC_DEEP

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Apr 13, 2005
    Messages:
    9,029
    Likes Received:
    12
    Somewhat true. During the Clinton administration, the Justice Department made [at least] an attempt at balance, cronies or not. But it does not really make sense to say that the repubs don't have qualified nominees because the dems filled those positions with unqualified judges. Some of the nominees have never been judges before, some have. The point is that whomever is doing the nominating and appointing should at least check backgrounds. If he's been caught accepting bribes and falsifying his tax returns, he most likely should not be appointed as a tax court judge. If he has no experience in tax law, he should not be nominated as a tax court judge. If he has no experience, or a bad track record in immigration, he should not be in a presiding position in that area.
    I agree with this regarding District Attorneys, Circuit Court prosecutors, and most especially, our current Attorney General. He's proven time and again that he has no problem lying or ignoring existing law, or twisting current law to meet his own needs. No moral fiber whatsoever, and no integrity.
     
  19. rawbone8

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    2,864
    Albums:
    1
    Likes Received:
    4
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Canada
    It may be wrong, but it is a well established practice for the government of the day in Canada to make patronage appointments as rewards to the loyal troops who helped them in the past. When the government changes over to the other political party they do their best to reward their own.

    The scandal is when they are caught making a blantantly unqualified, inept appointment or when the appointee delivers political favours to those connected to the party. (meaning cash donors and cronies)

    There have been scandals beyond politics, in which a slimeball, politically appointed immigration/refugee claims judge was caught trying to coerce a Korean woman refugee claimant to have a sexual affair with him to win her case. He was actually videotaped making the overture and also threatening her if she revealed any information about the deal. He had been a two term Toronto city councillor (alderman) before being appointed by the Liberal Chretien government to this quasi-judicial position.
     
  20. dong20

    Gold Member

    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2006
    Messages:
    6,130
    Likes Received:
    5
    Location:
    The grey country
    I know, so long as the postholders would be eligible on merit it's less irritating. But competence and impartiality don't always go hand in hand.

    Exactly.

    There have been similar scandals in the IND in the UK with Immigration Officers trading sex for indefinate leave to remain stamps.
     
Draft saved Draft deleted