• Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 days ago

          The appellate courts do not hear anywhere near the volume of cases that district judges go through.

          • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 days ago

            But supreme court sets precedent for the other courts and deals with most potentially damaging cases.

            • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              6 days ago

              Precedent is set by every court. The Supreme Court considers what 9 judges think are the most important cases but a lot of times they aren’t. They regularly punt on difficult decisions. District courts don’t really have as much ability to do that so a lot of law is created at the local level. Also, the judges define the culture of the court.

              • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                edit-2
                6 days ago

                The precedent set by circuit courts is only binding to court’s own jurisdiction and can be overridden by the supreme court if it wants. And the cases that can make or break democracy will be heard by the supreme court.

      • CosmicTurtle0@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        Chevron doctrine wasn’t overturned by a federal district court judge.

        It was overturned by a group of regulatory captured supreme court justices.

        Sure, all judges are important but let’s not placate ourselves in saying that Biden has filled more judges than Trump.

        The damage the court has done to jurisprudence is going to be felt for decades.

  • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    29
    ·
    6 days ago

    Such a weird thing to be excited about. Biden will get half the time to make appointments. This is the AstroTurf of good news.

  • skuzz@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    6 days ago

    The end of a vaguely-functioning America is so…tepid. Really shows how long we’ve been screwed. Movies got us wrong every time.

  • enkers@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Doesn’t it not really matter that much since the majority of SCOTUS judges are R appointees, and they get to pick and choose which appeals they want to rule on?

    I’m not American, so please forgive me if I’m misunderstanding your judicial system.

    • n2burns@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 days ago

      You’re right about the mechanism of the Supreme Court justices. They rule on many important cases and regularly set precident.

      However, since the vast, vast majority of cases don’t end up in the Supreme Court, lower courts have a massive impact into how justice is served.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 days ago

        That’s true, and I guess for smaller decisions the lower courts will have some leeway, but they ultimately still have to follow precedent set by SCOTUS.

  • pyre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    18
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    awesome, that means abortion rights are protected again, right?

  • GiddyGap@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    6 days ago

    Unfortunately, the orange is about to appoint a ton more. I hate this timeline.

  • caveman8000@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    Why don’t we just take the whole “appointment of judges” away. Why are we not electing judges?

    • Pips@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      6 days ago

      Elected judges are far worse than appointed. You do not want someone campaigning and judging cases at the same time. They inevitably issue decisions that have precedential downstream effects and are based purely on trying to win their electorate.

    • usernamesAreTricky@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      21
      ·
      6 days ago

      Direct popular vote judge elections have their own set of issues - at the very least for lower courts

      For instance, they tend to lead towards judges issuing out harsher penalties when campaigning than they normally would to appear “'tough on crime”

    • d00phy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 days ago

      Look who the electorate just chose to run the country. You want them selecting judges too!? It’s slightly better the way it is since there’s at least some oversight.

  • venusaur@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    13
    ·
    6 days ago

    Now that Dems already lost the vote and don’t need to dangle carrots for fear votes, they gotta make some PR moves for 2028.

      • Cataphract@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 days ago

        Ok, but I’ll admit I’m confused on the praise or whatever is going on. Appointing judges is the duty of the President, so he did his job? Well he doesn’t actually appoint, it’s the senate who confirms, so, yay Senate?

        To Cohen, the law professor from Drexel, the news is more nuanced than either Democrats or Republicans would like it to be. “Multiple things can be true at the same time,” he told me Sunday. “It’s fantastic they confirmed so many judges to counterbalance the Trump cadre of judges. But also, there should be zero vacancies remaining.”

        (context)

        there are still 36 judicial vacancies he can fill in the federal courts, all but 2 in the district courts. (A couple of Biden’s nominees did not wind up being confirmed after he reportedly did not formally submit their nominations to the Senate in time.)

        so if we’re averaging it out like he didn’t turn in 38 assignments, he got a 86% (B grade). Happy he did the thing, just not sure on the fanfare of it all.