I thought the whole point of lawyers was that everybody gets one? Is there any shame in defending El Chapo?
My thoughts exactly. I mean, you could reject a case, I suppose, but it seems that all those “what it takes to be a good lawyer” stories have the hero defending an indefensible monster meerly because everyone deserves a solid defense. i.e. that tom hanks movie about him defending a Soviet spy.
deleted by creator
ELI5 why would you elect a judge? You want judge to be independent from politics and just legal expert, here to apply strictly the law and limit as much as possible the weight of their personal opinions, so every citizen is judged the same way.
Electing judge seems backward and totally opposite to that goal
This entirely depends on your point of view.
We also passively vote on the law by electing the people in charge of passing it. Why not also vote on the people interpreting it?
How else do you want to fill the position for a judge? By a panel of experts? Who decides who is part of this panel? Who decides what the selection process is?
Effectively there is a popular voting process somewhere. The debate is only where exactly in the chain.
What are the other options?
Edit: why would someone down vote a question? It’s not like it’s even a leading question.
I’ll try to answer myself. Options for how a judge is put in their position:
Elected or appointed. Are there any other options?
If they are appointed then you better really trust whoever does the appointing because you will have no recourse if they are a bad fit.
Peer selected is also a possibility, as well as passing a law exam, like the bar but for judges.
Mexico is doomed.
