|
GlyphGryph posted:The justice system is the one area of the law where they've gone full hog with positive rights though? I mean, this is the system where you have the right to force 6-12 of your peers, under the threat of law, to serve without pay in judging your case. It's the system where you have a right to a public defender, period. It's a system practically dominated by positive rights that would be seen as egregious violations in other contexts. I don't doubt that they don't want to look at it too closely, but I don't think it's a fear of positive rights holding them back. Offer not valid in all states, terms and conditions apply.
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The justice system is the one area of the law where they've gone full hog with positive rights though? I mean, this is the system where you have the right to force 6-12 of your peers, under the threat of law, to serve without pay in judging your case. It's the system where you have a right to a public defender, period. It's a system practically dominated by positive rights that would be seen as egregious violations in other contexts. I don't doubt that they don't want to look at it too closely, but I don't think it's a fear of positive rights holding them back. Jury duty pays you. It's a laughably pathetic amount far below minimum wage, but it does pay.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
My job pays me if I get jury duty. I'll never be asked to serve on a jury though I work in a DA's office
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Gorau posted:The issue with underfunded public defenders is a common one throughout common law countries with adversarial systems. Does anyone know if the civil law non adversarial systems have the same issues? Or if they do, are they to the extent that we do? Legal Aid is chronically under-funded in Canada.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:19
|
|
|
showbiz_liz posted:I emailed a couple colleagues who do legal aid advocacy to ask, but I think the answer's no - or at least, not since the case 50-odd years ago that forced them to establish the system in the first place. The story of this case is kinda cool and everyone should read it. Also it kinda answers this question: Hieronymous Alloy posted:Yeah it happens but how many successful out of how many filed? The successful pro se litigant at that level is a unicorn.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 03:23
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:The justice system is the one area of the law where they've gone full hog with positive rights though? I mean, this is the system where you have the right to force 6-12 of your peers, under the threat of law, to serve without pay in judging your case. It's the system where you have a right to a public defender, period. It's a system practically dominated by positive rights that would be seen as egregious violations in other contexts. I don't doubt that they don't want to look at it too closely, but I don't think it's a fear of positive rights holding them back. I think it is more exasperation at dealing with laypeople coming up with sovereign citizen stuff on the spot while they are working through what the hell is going on made them break down and force the government to pay for some actual professionals.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
HappyHippo posted:The story of this case is kinda cool and everyone should read it. It's also a drat good movie starring Henry Fonda. It's available on YouTube in 11 parts. Part 1 of Gideon's Trumpet.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:10
|
|
|
The whole logic behind not being able to freeze assets because it hurts their ability to defend themselves reminds me of the Onion skit about a white girl being tried as a black adult. "This is America. Nobody deserves to be treated as a [poor] man."
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 06:26
|
|
|
Gorau posted:The issue with underfunded public defenders is a common one throughout common law countries with adversarial systems. Does anyone know if the civil law non adversarial systems have the same issues? Or if they do, are they to the extent that we do? Pretty much - almost every country in the world has this issue, partly because it's only been recognized as a human right pretty recently (and partly because nobody gives a gently caress about ~criminals~). Hard data is still pretty sketchy but UNODC is doing a study on global legal aid right now. It's an interesting issue because a lot of countries now have these shiny new constitutions which were written with input from the UN, so they guarantee all kinds of rights (like the right to legal representation) but the countries in question have never provided legal aid before and either don't care to implement it or don't know how to. A couple of countries that are doing a decent job at providing legal aid right now are South Africa and Argentina. The first international conference on criminal legal aid was held in South Africa in 2014 and there's going to be a second one in Argentina this year - basically, the international community is juuuuust now starting to pay attention to this as an issue, probably because of the whole "exploding pre-trial prison populations" thing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2016 17:52
|
|
|
So in the USPol thread there's chatter about the DC Madam stuff coming out because her lawyer is making all kinds of noise about it being a bombshell for the presidential election. The guy's already went so far as to try to get it to the Supreme Court and they've put it on the docket. Is this one of those things the court will go out of their way for maybe? Or is this going to slowly work its way though the sausage press? For laughs the lawyer also put all the related records for the DC Madam stuff on a dead man's switch which seems to be all kinds of amazing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 03:29
|
|
|
The funniest thing is that George Mason's law school isn't particularly good.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 05:22
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:The funniest thing is that George Mason's law school isn't particularly good. Appropriate then, because neither was Scalia.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
Shakugan posted:The funniest thing is that George Mason's law school isn't particularly good. Hence the name change; ASSoLs will make good attorneys.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 07:31
|
|
|
I'm enjoying that acronym more than I should.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 07:34
|
|
|
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jerry-moran-no-longer-supports-hearings-scotus-nominee Jerry Moran is a literally a deer in the headlights
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 19:50
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jerry-moran-no-longer-supports-hearings-scotus-nominee Get a brain, Moran.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 20:46
|
|
|
Kazak_Hstan posted:http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/jerry-moran-no-longer-supports-hearings-scotus-nominee More like a deer in a crosshairs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 2, 2016 21:30
|
|
|
Merrick Garland is totally unacceptable as a candidate to sit on the Supreme Court and that is why I will not participate in hearings to advise the president that his candidate is unacceptable.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 08:36
|
|
|
Evil Fluffy posted:Jury duty pays you. It's a laughably pathetic amount far below minimum wage, but it does pay. At lead in my state its only if it takes more than three days
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 13:04
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:At lead in my state its only if it takes more than three days
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 20:02
|
|
|
twodot posted:What state is this? State and federal cases are different. Federal court juror compensation is $40 per day across the board ($50 beyond 45 days), but if you're selected for a state-level case, then your state laws apply instead. For example, Pennsylvania where I currently live: quote:Pennsylvania law provides that no employer may deprive an employee of employment or threaten or otherwise coerce him or her for the reason that the employee receives a summons, attends court for prospective jury service, or serves as a juror. quote:According to PA law, jurors are paid $9.00 per day for the first three days of jury service and $25.00 per day for every day thereafter. Pa law also calls for payment of mileage at the rate of .17 cents per mile.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 20:07
|
|
|
Sundae posted:State and federal cases are different. Federal court juror compensation is $40 per day across the board ($50 beyond 45 days), but if you're selected for a state-level case, then your state laws apply instead.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 20:13
|
|
|
My employer pays me if I'm selected for jury duty
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 21:21
|
|
|
WhiskeyJuvenile posted:My employer pays me if I'm selected for jury duty Isn't your employer the US government?
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Isn't your employer the US government? I think every job I've worked since I was 18 paid their employees if they had jury duty. You've got to sign over your fat jury duty checks to your employer, but you get paid normally without it affecting vacation or sick time. I'm more disappointed that I've never gotten chosen for jury duty. I always get kicked out of the pool fairly early.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 22:22
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Isn't your employer the US government? 
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 22:24
|
|
|
You're a government lawyer, you must never make it past voir dire.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 23:23
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:You're a government lawyer, you must never make it past voir dire. He does patent stuff. You can get seated as a patent lawyer - I have.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Interesting. I was under the impression anyone with a bar card usually gets struck.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
Rygar201 posted:Interesting. I was under the impression anyone with a bar card usually gets struck. It depends. I got seated on a criminal case because I have next to zero criminal experience, including in law school, and I think the defense attorney liked that most of my work is for defendants and the prosecutor liked that I (look like) a white male. Being a lawyer makes you less likely to get seated, but you're only getting struck automatically if you have knowledge relevant to the case. I'm never getting seated for a patent trial, but a criminal lawyer might.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
Gyges posted:I think every job I've worked since I was 18 paid their employees if they had jury duty. You've got to sign over your fat jury duty checks to your employer, but you get paid normally without it affecting vacation or sick time. My employer thankfully covered my time without problem, but since I only spent two days on the Jury before we rendered a verdict I didn't even have to give them the nonexistent check. Massachussets, btw. Nothing for the first three days, $50 a day for day 4 and beyond. I could not believe they don't even cover the cost of parking in their garage or transit, especially since there's an effective minimum 1 hour commute for jury duty here (I've never seen anyone called to their local court, it's always multiple towns over, I assume it's intentional though I don't know why). One of the staff gave of the jurors I was with the money to get the bus (out of his own pocket) since the juror couldn't afford to make the trip.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 03:20
|
|
|
GlyphGryph posted:I've never seen anyone called to their local court, it's always multiple towns over, I assume it's intentional though I don't know why). Because they're getting called for jury duty at the Federal or County level. Every state gets to do it their way if they want, but it's usually cheaper to have a nice county courthouse where you hold all the judging stuff. Most often this is located at the county seat. Federal jury duty is going to be called to the city where your district court is set up.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 04:06
|
|
|
Kalman posted:It depends. I got seated on a criminal case because I have next to zero criminal experience, including in law school, and I think the defense attorney liked that most of my work is for defendants and the prosecutor liked that I (look like) a white male.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 04:18
|
|
|
Gyges posted:Because they're getting called for jury duty at the Federal or County level. Every state gets to do it their way if they want, but it's usually cheaper to have a nice county courthouse where you hold all the judging stuff. Most often this is located at the county seat. Federal jury duty is going to be called to the city where your district court is set up. In MA's case it actually involves being assigned to various town courts over the county --- and the counties are pretty huge.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 04:26
|
|
|
I wish I could do jury duty once. I got called for it when I was a 1L and asked the court admin if I could do it over Christmas break when I would be home. She just excused me even though I begged her to keep me on the list. Haven't been called since, but I doubt I'm getting seated as a LEO with a bar card.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 04:41
|
|
|
Green Crayons posted:Are you a non-male gendered minority in disguise or something? I'm Hispanic on one side. I look exactly like my parent on the other side, though. Some of my family are not quite so lucky.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
One Person One Vote challenge unanimously rejected.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Nice try Koch Bros.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 16:52
|
|
|
fourwood posted:One Person One Vote challenge unanimously rejected. However, Thomas, shockingly, is pushing a states right's angle in the concurrence.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 16:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 19:57 |
|
|
Have there been any cases about the huge delay in trials nowadays? It seems like there's a 2-3 year delay for even minor criminal cases with no ongoing investigation (at least here), which seems rather at odds with the sixth amendment.
|
|
#
?
Apr 4, 2016 16:54
|
|